Re: [PATCH 3/4] base.bbclass: include PV in 'incompatible license but whitelisted' debug

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 11:13 -0700, Andre McCurdy wrote:
> Referencing PN only is ambiguous if multiple versions of a recipe are
> present.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andre McCurdy <armccurdy@gmail.com>
> ---
>  meta/classes/base.bbclass | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/meta/classes/base.bbclass b/meta/classes/base.bbclass
> index 67b3370..d91e059 100644
> --- a/meta/classes/base.bbclass
> +++ b/meta/classes/base.bbclass
> @@ -537,7 +537,8 @@ python () {
>                      raise bb.parse.SkipPackage("incompatible with
> license %s" % license)
>              elif pn in whitelist:
>                  if pn in incompatwl:
> -                    bb.note("INCLUDING " + pn + " as buildable
> despite INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE because it has been whitelisted")
> +                    p = d.getVar('P', True)
> +                    bb.note("INCLUDING " + p + " as buildable
> despite INCOMPATIBLE_LICENSE because it has been whitelisted")
>  
>      needsrcrev = False
>      srcuri = d.getVar('SRC_URI', True)

FWIW, looking into this has been on my todo list. I've now merged a
patch and events generated from recipes during parsing are now
automatically prefixed with the recipe filename (we might not know
PN/PV at that point).

Hopefully that means we can simplify some of these messages rather than
meaning we have to ensure every one contains PN/PV.

Cheers,

Richard